Aaron Sherman: # Ok, so I read Miguel's message: # # http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-hackers/2002-February/msg # 00031.html # # I drank the cool-aid and now I find myself thinking... should Perl6 # compile down to its own byte-code or to Mono's CIL? Miguel # feels this is # the way to go, and if Mono's bytecode is in fact so flexible that many # languages will be able to communicate through it, then perhaps we're # shooting ourselves in the feet by NOT targetting Perl6's # back-end there. # # I realize that this has the twin drawbacks of introducing the # stigma of # a Microsoft technology into Perl's core and moving away from the # wonderful work done thus far on Perl6's byte-code. However, if there # will ever be a time to make this choice, it would seem that now is it. # # Some pros: # # * If Miguel is able to swing the community, Gnome4 will # heavily rely on # Mono. If Perl is Mono-ready, that will make Perl a much more # attractive # technology for new Gnome libraries and applications. # * If Perl6 uses CIL, then there will be a much larger community # supporting the back-end. Also, there will be a ready-made community of # people who understand how to integrate Mono-bytecoded # applications into # their infrastructures (from Web services to development # platforms, etc).
>From the FAQ referenced in my sig (just s#\.NET#Mono#g): 11. Why your own virtual machine? Why not compile to JVM/.NET? Those VMs are designed for statically typed languages. That's fine, since Java, C#, and lots of other languages are statically typed. Perl isn't. For a variety of reasons, it means that perl would run more slowly there than on an interpreter geared towards dynamic languages. 12. So you won't run on the JVM/.NET? Sure we will. They're just not our first target. We build our own interpreter/VM, then when that's working we start in on the JVM and/or ..NET back ends. --Brent Dax [EMAIL PROTECTED] Parrot Configure pumpking and regex hacker Check out the Parrot FAQ: http://www.panix.com/~ziggy/parrot.html (no, it's not mine) <obra> mmmm. hawt sysadmin chx0rs <lathos> This is sad. I know of *a* hawt sysamin chx0r. <obra> I know more than a few. <lathos> obra: There are two? Are you sure it's not the same one?
